stating that "parental notice and consent are qualifications that typically may be imposed by the State on a minor's right to make important decisions. As immature minors often lack the ability to make fully informed choices that take account of both immediate and long-range consequences, a State reasonably may determine that parental consultation often is desirable and in the best interest of the minor"
How later courts described this case
- stating that "parental notice and consent are qualifications that typically may be imposed by the State on a minor's right to make important decisions. As immature minors often lack the ability to make fully informed choices that take account of both immediate and long-range consequences, a State reasonably may determine that parental consultation often is desirable and in the best interest of the minor"
- holding that children have special needs in respect to constitutionally protected rights including their “peculiar vulnerability,” “inability to make critical decisions in an informed, mature manner,” as well as “the importance of the parental role in child rearing”
- holding that judicial bypass process for , minors “must assure that a resolution of the issue, and any appeals that may follow, will be completed with anonymity and sufficient expedition to. provide an effective opportunity for an abortion to be obtained”
- ruling that “if the State decides to require a pregnant minor to obtain one or both parents’ consent to an abortion, it must also provide an alternative procedure whereby authorization for the abortion can be obtained” (footnote omitted)
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Disagreed with by Planned Parenthood Of Southern Arizona v. Barbara Lawall, 307 F.3d 783 (2002)
We reject appellees' contention that this provision alone satisfiesBellotti II's anonymity requirement.
The opinion
Mr. Justice Rehnquist,
concurring.
I join the opinion of Mr. Justice Powell and the judgment of the Court. At such time as this Court is willing to *652 reconsider its earlier decision in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U. S. 52 (1976), in which I joined the opinion of Mr. Justice White, dissenting in part, I shall be more than willing to participate in that task. But unless and until that time comes, literally thousands of judges cannot be left with nothing more than the guidance offered by a truly fragmented holding of this Court.